Talk:Ruscism/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Rashism Putinism Merge

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The result of this discussion was oppose Abcmaxx (talk) 10:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

---

{{merge|Rashism|Putinism|target=Rashism|date=April 2022}}

I propose merging Rashism and Putinism as both seem to be the same ideology. Putinism is just more focused on the ideology pre-2022 and Rashism 2022-present MaitreyaVaruna (changing name to Immainuelle) please tag me (talk) 19:36, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Are there any scholarly sources using the word "Rashism" at all? Do we truly need this article? Alaexis_¿question? 19:59, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Well, this page is not about the word, but about the concept/subject, i.e. the alleged transformation of Russia to a fascist state/country. As about the word, it does appear in English language books, but again, this page is not about the word. To avoid such discussion, I suggested an alternative descriptive title, i.e. Fascist transformation of Russian state, but it was not supported. What title would you suggest? I am not saying this is indeed a fascist country, only that such subject was discussed in many publications (which should not necessarily be "scholar") and therefore deserves a page. But in any event, Putinism is a claim about something different (random ref: [1]).My very best wishes (talk) 20:20, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

  I think it is notable that that source is from 2013, before the Annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation and well before the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. The reference with the First Chechen War is a more notable distinction but I'd describe it as being a kind of prehistory of the concept, in the same way refugee camps in WWI Germany had an influence in Nazi concentration camps MaitreyaVaruna (changing name to Immanuelle) please tag me (talk) 00:33, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

Here is one most obvious thing. That assertion about fascist transformation (initially named as "ruscism") appeared already during First Chechen war, i.e. under Yeltsin administration. This can not be attributed exclusively to Putin. My very best wishes (talk) 20:28, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

In this case I support a change of the title. It comes off as more of an ideology than a societal transformation MaitreyaVaruna (changing name to Immanuelle) please tag me (talk) 20:25, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Oh no, fascism is not just an ideology, but also a societal transformation. My very best wishes (talk) 20:37, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

The proposed new title would likely fail WP:NPOV. Some people would disagree with the characterisation in the proposed title. Alaexis_¿question? 19:51, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support These aren’t exactly equivalent, but rashism seems vague enough as a distinct concept to disappear as an article. —Michael Z. 01:00, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

  Oppose Changed my mind, after reading Snyder’s essay about the word and concept.[2] —Michael Z. 01:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose They aren’t really exactly equivalent, and it seems that rashism should be developed in the future as a more aggressive offshot of putinism. Jingiby (talk) 03:26, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support Merging to Putinism. This term is not supported by any academic source. The page exists today because it was created by a sock, and it was frequently restored and expanded by 2 socks. Same person used 3 sockpuppets to edit war on this page per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/IgorTurzh. Also notify @Jr8825, HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith, and My very best wishes: about this development. NavjotSR (talk) 07:30, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

  It appears that was a legit account. @IgorTurzh:? My very best wishes (talk) 00:16, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

  @My very best wishes hey, everything is okay. it was a mistake. No one is blocked or suspected as a sockpuppet. IgorTurzh (talk) 19:12, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

• Support some merge: this article would be unlikely to survive an AfD given how weak the sourcing is for the term 'Rashism'. — Charles Stewart (talk) 14:03, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. What would be a justification for such merger? Which RS say that Putinism and Rashism (modern-day alleged fascist nature of Russia) is the same subject? Academic sources, such as this, say they are different. And again, this page is not about the word, but about the subject. My very best wishes (talk) 16:14, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support. The sources, at least the ones in the article, do not constitute significant coverage of the concept and therefore WP:GNG are not satisfied. The scope of the article is unclear - is it an article about a unique ideology? Or is it about the transformation of Russia in the last 20 years as User:My very best wishes said earlier? Alaexis_¿question? 17:36, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

  If the latter, then this pages should be moved/renamed to Fascist transformation of Russia, which is a descriptive title. But there are no RS saying that Rashism and Putinism are exactly same subject. Quite the opposite: [3]. According to nominator, "both seem to be the same ideology". Seem to whom? This is WP:OR. Not mentioning that none of these subjects is about an ideology. My very best wishes (talk) 20:04, 16 April 2022 (UTC)

  But here is my suggestion. Please make an additional subsection on page Putinism (in this section [4]) that describes it as a variety of fascism, along with several other alternative interpretations of "Putinism". Then, the suggestion to merge will be a lot more credible, although one could still argue that such interpretation deserves a separate sub-page. My very best wishes (talk) 02:22, 17 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose. Why combine an article about Putinism, in the center of which there is a cult of the personal president of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, with an article on an ideology mentioned before Vladimir Putin's rule?[5] The concepts of rashism and putunism are different. While Putinism is based on the personality of Vladimir Putin as leader, rashism is based on the ideas of the "Russian world concept" - the "special mission of Russians", including a strong cult of personality (only in this respect rashism is related to putinism), militarism, totalitarianism, Russian imperialism and the idea of mobilization of nation and state against Western enemies, the idea of constant war and domination (Eurasianism). —Uliana245 Uliana245. 21:49, 16 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. While there is some overlap Rashism/Ruscism(/Russism) and Putinism are different topics. The first is about a broader concept or ideology of the "modern" form of fascism that has emerged in Russia over the past decades, the second term is specifically about the political system under Putin's leadership. I would have prefered if this article, which was formerly named "Russian fascism (ideology)", would not have been renamed to "Rashism", but I learned from those discussions that the former descriptive title was felt to be too ambiguous, so I'm okay with the name change. It is possible that over time historians and journalists will find another name for the concept, or that we may come up with a better descriptive title, but lumping the topic together with Putinism does not seem to be a good idea as this would cause readers to assume that they are synonyms for the same thing. --Matthiaspaul (talk) 09:02, 17 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. While publicating the article in Slovenian wikipedia I carefully read the sourses in all languages: Ukrainian, Russian, English, and that is clear, that Rashism exists much longer than just Putin/Putinism and Rashism is immanent in Russia's history. It's really rooted in the Russian culture, Russian orthodoxy and political system. It's a fare broader phenomenon, than it may look from the first view. Keep it Rashism and expand the article. Ranná hviezda (talk) 16:37, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose After unsuccessful AfD process, the article was redirected/softdeleted, then restored and right now it is being discussed to merge with another page. I see here clear WP:GAME. The consensus was not to delete. So I ask to leave the article alone for some time. Why I'm against merging? Because, Putinism is the charachteristic of Putin's last decade, while Rashism/Russian Fascism is more about philosophy and the worldview of Russian statesman, elites and politicians. Putin will die some day, but Rashism will not disappear. That's the point and that's the difference between Putinism and Rashism. --IgorTurzh (talk) 19:21, 18 April 2022 (UTC)

  TNT-level difficulties with the article were raised in that AfD and not seriously disputed. The lack of consensus in the AfD was just that - people did not agree on a particular course of action - but the content of the AfD provides strong justification for doing something about this article. — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

• We should keep both articles I think that although the ideologies seem similar on the surface, they’re still separate. Rashism evolved from putinism, but it’s not the same. Putinism was mostly about the internal economy, policies and politics. The impact of rashism on the other hand is very much international and it comes from russians actually believing in the fake reality created by russian media. Basically we received rashism by letting putinism live and prosper. Stepio (talk) 07:31, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I think Rashism is an already well known word that is widely used in the world, and especially in post USSR countries. It's no doubt that it is an existing term that should definitely be on Wikipedia. It's a new phenomenon that describes ideology of Russia. It's not Putinism at all because it's clear that Putin is only one of many and his lastname can't describe the entire ideology of millions. Ihor-lav (talk) 08:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Comment - Could Russian nationalism#Extremist nationalism be an alternate merge target ? — Charles Stewart (talk) 08:39, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

  I think Russian fascism and Russian nationalism are different terms, I would leave them separated. Ihor-lav (talk) 08:54, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose It may take longer than Putin itself not changing any better. --Олюсь (talk) 09:22, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I oppose the merging as it will conceal the true identity of the phenomenon. Putinism is a purely mental construct, which has no ground roots to the real world. It describes something that do not actually exist, at least in terms of mass ideology. Rashism, however, has a solid ideological basis and is described perfectly as a russian fascism. 93.175.234.56 (talk) 09:24, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree that these two concepts are different - Putinism is being rooted in the personality of Putin, while Rashism is touching the Russian nation as a whole. Besides this, I see that the term Rashism is used much more frequently than Putinism after 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine. Internetyev (talk) 10:16, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Putinism is more of a governmental structure and a personality cult, while Rashism is a form of fascisms with some differences. A person can be a putinist while not being a rashist and vice versa. Rashism has accent on national superiority and incline for world domination with US and NATO as a main enemies, while putinism doesn't. Anton.argon (talk) 10:25, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. I concur with the previous comment. Putinism is a type of governance associated with President Putin. Despite Putin's role in fostering it, Rashism is an ideology of extreme messianic nationalism which exists beyond and independent of Putin's clique and will most likely survive them. --Kober^Talk 13:03, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Rashism is Russian ideology that is independent of Putinism and was mentioned by Dudaev as early as 1995. Kyrylkov (talk) 21:12, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Putinism is limited to Putin's regime, while Rashism encompasses the entirety of Russian ideology. Hatteras (talk) 23:32, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
• Comment. I noticed an editor involved here who was initially indef blocked for sockpuppetry and then unblocked has engaged in canvassing here by getting editors from Ukrainian wiki here. And I already noticed the sudden comments by Russian IPs. Sorry but this whole page smells of sockpuppetry/meatpuppetry/canvassing etc. Mellk (talk) 09:40, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

  I regret to inform you that you are wrong. I wasn't blocked and unblocked, I was blocked by mistake. second, I didnt' ask anyone, I just informed on 6 April the community that such page exists. You can track that no-one edited on 6 April from Ukrainian IP's or Ukrainian wikipedians. You may wonder, why so many people are now editing and commenting? The reason is that media started talking about this page, including Telegram channels, and ven Nevzorov posted it. Please, don't put everything together into onw bowl. IgorTurzh (talk) 11:42, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

  I am not accusing you of socking, I just noticed that you were initially blocked for suspected sockpuppetry but were unblocked per WP:AGF and CU noted that socking was possibility but not clear enough for block. OK, I would also like to AGF. I just noticed inactive editors appearing here and other new accounts. I just think that your comments on the Ukrainian wiki talk page since then has attracted such editors. I also noticed here yesterday a number of Russian IPs appear all of a sudden, so it is something that should be considered and a need to be careful. Mellk (talk) 13:16, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

  @Mellk to be frank, my 6 April comment on UA wiki didn't make any difference. It's all because of mass media which made the article viral: both Ukrainian and Russians. Thanks for cooperation and attention. IgorTurzh (talk) 14:46, 21 April 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: Careful with red link accounts. Most seem to be SPAs. Similar things happened during the 2020 Nagorno-Karabakh war, a lot of SPAs and meatpuppets spawned. Beshogur (talk) 13:01, 21 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support Rashism is a neologism, a journalist invention created after the war in Ukraine. No scholarly work justifies an independent term. A lot of the references given does not even mention Rashism. Expressions such as "Russian nationalism" or "Russian imperialism" are better options. The argument developed on this page looks quite ad hoc and biased, and it would be better to mention this term in an article about Putinism. Thank you for your attention! Mrtno (talk) 08:56, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

It was not created after the war in Ukraine. It was first mentioned by Dudaev in 1995. Well before ANY wars in Ukraine. Kyrylkov (talk) 16:16, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose term Putinism implies that such ideology is based or surrounded on/around Mr. Putin and his gang, thus named after him. Term Rashism was coined before Mr Putin had any major opportunity to influence politics of Russian Federation, and this belief in "special purpose" of Russian culture to defend traditional family values and "rights of white people" is unlikely to disappear along with Mr. Putin. --AndriiKhmelkov (talk) 18:40, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. Rashism/Russism had already existed when Vladimir Putin took over power (see the paragraph about 1995 statement of Dzhokhar Dudayev devoted to Russism). Rashism/Russism is about mentality of Russians, Putinism is about Putin's ideology. K8M8S8 (talk) 19:23, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose ideology deference, keep both articles. 103.141.159.74 (talk) 19:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Russian fascism is a clear, distinct term, a concept separate from a single leader (Putin), and existed before Putin Jason C.K. (talk) 21:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose they are separate terms and deserve separate articles. -🇺🇦Slava🇺🇦Ukraini🇺🇦Heroyam🇺🇦Slava🇺🇦(talk)🇺🇦 17:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
• Support (moving contents of Rashism to Putinism or to Fascism in Russia): Rashism is not a term, but rather a propaganda word, made to criticize Putinism (before Putin, the concept of "Rashism" hadn't been really developed, "special purpose of Russia" and "traditional values" had existed even before the Revolution and don't need a special word "Rashism"); it's not a certain unique fascist regime or a clear fascist ideology (at least formally), but a word that basically means "Putinism", a critical and one-sided word for Putinism; if Putinists will develop and formalize their ideology (and they will, see https://www.mk.ru/social/2022/04/06/institutu-filosofii-ran-poruchili-sozdat-novuyu-ideologiyu-rossii.html) and make a fascist regime, it won't be called "Rashism" (for example there are words "Russian world" and "Sovereign democracy" already) Opostylov (talk) 05:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Nvm, Oppose Opostylov (talk) 05:46, 02 May 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose, the politics of Putin are a mere expression of russian fashism, rashism, which also has other variants, in the ideology promoted by other russian rashists, like fashism had other variants in the form of Hitler's nazism, strasserism, etc. Rashism is yet another variant of fashism, but currently it has not yet been fully absorbed into putinism, with putinism being identical to the concept of rashism. Heracletus (talk) 02:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
• Consensus is clear. Most people oppose the merge. End this discussion. Super Ψ Dro 18:56, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

Just realized I actually didn't vote here before. Oppose proposal as well, they're different topics. Super Ψ Dro 18:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)

References

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Removal due to lack of fact described by this word

This article should be deleted because it has nothing to do with reality and is just a collection of quotes from random people who do not have evidence of the existence of fascism in Russia at the state level.

In view of the non-obviousness of the criterion "Nazism" I will propose a criterion that is obvious to everyone - discrimination based on nationality. Please provide a link to any law of the Russian Federation that restricts some nationality and distinguishes it from others.

Since the article (Rashism) is almost entirely devoted to Ukraine, it would be better if evidence of discrimination against Ukrainians on the territory of Russia is provided. 176.77.53.252 (talk) 04:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

— 176.77.53.252 (talk) has made few or no other edits outside this topic.

Your post describes so very far from what is actually in the article it's difficult to respond. I will assume good faith and WP:IDONTLIKEIT on your part but I would say that a) you haven't provided any examples as what quote you object to and b) provided nothing in support of your wild theories. As for the sources and quotes; well that's how even academic pieces of work are written, citing other works. All the sources are WP:RS and there's a wide variety too from different source and parts of the globe. As for deletion there was a WP:AFD and the result was to keep. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:26, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

a) All links should be references to evidence, not what someone said.

b) I did not offer any "wild theory".

Have you heard anything about the principle of "presumption of innocence"? It implies that the accuser must prove his arguments. This principle exists because it is almost impossible to prove absence of something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/russell%27s_teapot

If there is no evidence of described phenomenon, all these references to words are only a collection of notes of insane. This article is nothing other than an attempt to slander Russia and insult its population, and must be removed.

P.S. Although I can give examples from the Western media that contradict this article https://imgur.com/a/pjaarlw

The perseverance with which commenters here refuse to see the need to prove their edits, but insist that links to unreasonable opinions is enough, makes me doubt in their good will. Instead, I suspect some of them in a deliberate attempt to harm society by spreading of lies.

I have to repeat my question. Do you have evidence of discrimination of a group of population on a national basis in Russia?

P.P.S. In scientific articles, facts refer to other facts. This article refers to unreasonable statements of random people. The only difference between these people and random people on the street - they were promoted on TV. 176.77.61.53 (talk) 06:53, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

They're not random people though are they, you're twisting facts. There are Russian sources in the article too and your claim of unreasonableness is subjective. Russia is a highly authoritarian state and has brutally invaded and pillaged a neighbouring country in the name of a new ideology, stating that Ukraine us suddenly Russia and shouldn't exist. That is not slander, that is what happened. This has led to the creation of new words to describe the phenomenon. Your denial in the face of evidence mirrors Russian state modus operandi; if its unfavourable, ignorance it or call it a lie, then distort. Abcmaxx (talk) 08:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)

Rashism is not a real term

It is difficult to understand the point of this article as all this information can be described in the article about Russian invasion as a separate section (with the title like "Transformation of Russia to the fascist state during the invasion). Anyways, the word "Rashism" is not used anywhere except Ukrainian propagandist media. If this article is to stay, it should describe "Rashism" as a Ukrainian perception of Russian ideology, and not as an objective real process. Lolipopm1995 (talk) 07:41, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

It's a new phenomenon of 21 century that describes ideology of Russia. Ihor-lav (talk) 08:50, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

There is no ideology in Russia. 176.77.56.106 (talk) 15:47, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

There is ideology in Russia. 2.28.151.172 (talk) 22:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Even if it is, nobody outside Ukraine uses the term "Rashism" to describe this ideology. Modern Russian imperialist views (like Dugin's) are often described simply as "Russian nationalism". Lolipopm1995 (talk) 09:48, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

The whole of this article so much against "Wikipedia is not a dictionary", against neutrality, against Wikipedia being not a place for original research and so on. Very problematic. It may be a good article on how the word is used in hate speech and what are the ideas, the presuppositions behind it, but as it is now, it's weird. Amikeco (talk) 11:59, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

"Rashism" doesn't exist as a real thing (ideology, process, phenomena, you name it) with some definitive characteristics. This term is used only by Ukrainian media and officials to describe something really ambiguous. That's why the majority of the article is just discussion of various Russian nationalist with no connection to something called "Rashism". I suggest deleting this article, merging it with existing articles for Russian World, Russian Nationalism, Putinism, etc., or rewriting it with a title like "Ideological foundations of modern Russian state." Lolipopm1995 (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

The New York Times considers it to be a real concept worth writing about and focusing on - see [6]. That's certainly notable enough for Wikipedia.

What is the difference between NYT and twitter accounts of ukraianian politicians? Just more words? Apparently this article was written only to be referenced from Wikipedia. 176.77.33.121 (talk) 01:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

What is the difference between NYT and twitter accounts of ukraianian politicians?

WP:RS. HappyWithWhatYouHaveToBeHappyWith (talk) 05:10, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

Article about the same. Ukrainians have come up with a word that shows their ignorance and their desire to offend Russia and Russians. This does not mean that it exists in reality. That is why we are talking about it here - because no one had ever heard of it until the Ukrainians added this article to Wikipedia. The only point of this article is to spread it.

The source must prove that in Russia fascism is at the state level, and not that the Ukrainians came up with this word. There is no doubt that the Ukrainians came up with this. Why should the insult that the Ukrainians come up with be on Wikipedia? 176.77.62.52 (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2022 (UTC)

According to the article, the concept and term were invented in 1995 by a Chechen Jason C.K. (talk) 01:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

When I was little and stupid, I also made up words. Let's add them to wikipedia, shall we? Wikipedia is not a dictionary of all the stupid words that someone once came up with.

Rashizm consists of two words "Russia" + "Fascism" - using it you say that in Russia there is fascism at the state level. Therefore, either there is evidence that fascism is supported in Russia at the state level, or you are a liar and a provocateur, because you hang labels to insult Russia.

Truth does not depend on the number of people repeating stupid things. 176.77.35.142 (talk) 02:02, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

The "notability" of the term is discussed elsewhere on this Talk page. I suggest you read that discussion, and participate if you are so inclined. It's been established already that it satisfied Wikipedia's "notability", so, it is already accepted as a "real word" for Wikipedia's purpose. A random word you invented would not satisfy Wikipedia's "notability"

Having satisfied "notability", if you wish to discuss the origins of the term, you can check the Talk page to see if anyone's brought it up, or bring it up yourself. You'll also have to read about the origins of the term already, since you apparently dispute the origin.

And yes, it's widely accepted that Putin and his government is fascist, but if you wish to debate that, that conversation, along with some scholarly resources related to it, are already elsewhere on this Talk page. I suggest you read that discussion, and participate if you are so inclined. Jason C.K. (talk) 02:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

"Widely accepted" like Obama is married to a man so he's gay, right?

You are taking the discussion in a different direction. You claim whether a word is worthy of a dictionary because NYT wrote about it. But Wikipedia is not a dictionary.

This thread (read above) discusses "Rashism is not a real term" it is "Ukrainian perception" of reality. I argue that these are the fantasies of some people, including some kind of "Widely accepted" fascism in Russia. Just like Assad's "well-documented" crimes in Syria and weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

This article is pure hate propaganda against Russia. 176.77.35.142 (talk) 03:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

I don't see the point of some of the facts and non-facts you are bringing up. Obama is married to a woman. Yes many scholars consider Putin and his regime to be fascist. Yes Assad has committed many crimes. No there were no WMDs in Iraq. What is the point of your statements?

I made no claims about why the word is notable for Wikipedia. Merely that the discussion is elsewhere in this Talk. Go talk to them about that if you care

Rashism is not a Ukrainian perception, since many non-Ukrainians perceive reality in the same way. The concept didn't even originate from Ukrainians. Jason C.K. (talk) 04:38, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

>>> I don't see the point of some of the facts and non-facts you are bringing up. Obama is married to a woman.

Try googling "obama married transgender" - that's what you call an "opinion".

>>> scholars consider Putin

It is not a matter of "faith" or "opinion". You offer to provide links or quotes. But quotes do not describe complex entities. The only thing that can be given is a link to history courses. Without knowledge, it is impossible to discuss difficult things, just as it is impossible to discuss the shades of the colors of the rainbow with the blind.

To begin with, people confuse nazism and fascism. Fascism - derived from Fasces - the word itself has no meaning, it's just a symbol. In essence, fascism is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corporatism, it was discredited due to its connection with the Nazis.

Someone says there is fascism in Russia (or rather, Nazism) is at an early stage. Those who claim this know what Nazism was like when the Nazis came to power?

The Nazis passed discriminatory laws against the Jews. They could be fired from their jobs without punishment. Signs were hung on their stores to not buy anything here, because this is a Jewish store. They were deprived of money. They were deprived of their property. Then they were forbidden to walk on sidewalks together with normal citizens. Then they were placed in concentration camps. And the population approved this, because they considered it normal.

Have you seen something like this in Russia:

- the bank refused to serve you because you are Italian

- americans are woken up at 5 am before the competition for doping tests - because they always lie

- britons banned from competition because they didn't renounce their country

- property was taken away from German businessmen because they are Germans

- banned books by French writers because they are French

Unthinkable! In Russia, this is impossible. But it happens in the West - live. Including the fact that it is accepted by society and considered normal.

Do you want to understand what Nazism looked like? Look in the mirror! Read the newspapers of the 30s of the last century - you will not find a difference with modern ones. Look at what the nazis propaganda of those years looked like. Spoiler: Jews with a Bolshevik star - that is, communists - all Russian, it was a European unifying idea - to fight the Bolsheviks. History repeats itself, you don't learn anything.

Get educated, do not copy quotes from stupid journalists with a degree in gender linguistics. 176.77.35.142 (talk) 05:49, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia has long turned into a collection of opinions of some biased pro-Western bloggers who do not meet the principles of logic, science, or even common sense. Only irresponsible statements. Only links to authorities someone wrote something somewhere. If this is the winner of all awards from the Intergalactic Institute of Insects and Democracy, receiving grants from London, then this is worthy of a special page and golden letters.

Where are the facts? Where is the proof? Where is the value of this word for mankind? 176.77.35.142 (talk) 04:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

The proof of Russia's genocidal war is everywhere. That's why your murderous troops are intended by the UN yo be tried for war crimes and crimes against humanity.2.28.151.172 (talk) 23:00, 15 May 2022 (UTC)

Ridiculous hyperbole like this is exactly the problem here. There is absolutely no proof of "genocide" in Ukraine on the part of the Russians. Yes there is a lot of death and destruction, but the term "genocide" means something very specific. You are doing nothing but proving the points of the comment you replied to by not providing any facts, proof, or value to this word "Rashism". Acteron (talk) 05:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Possible source

I see Timothy Snyder has posted an article in the New York Times on the term. Could this be a possible source? As a well known scholar on totalitarianism, his take should be considered relevant I think. Link: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/22/magazine/ruscism-ukraine-russia-war.html?smid=tw-share Euor (talk) 15:13, 23 April 2022 (UTC)

I also saw Zelensky mention the term in a press conference. Not sure where it would fit into the article, but perhaps could be used to show the prevalence of the term in Ukrainian society. Euor (talk) 00:37, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

And thirdly, the official twitter account of Ukraine just posted a video on “Ruscism” and what they see as it’s tenets and history: https://twitter.com/ukraine/status/1518217114766696449?s=21&t=aqS7aUZqU_VYuGstZwtp0w Euor (talk) 13:49, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

I think article by Snyder can be used. As about post on Twitter, no. If this is an official position by Ukrainian government (including views by Zelensky), that should be included, but needs to be better sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 20:44, 24 April 2022 (UTC)

Snyder published a new article (link), or rather opinion essay on NY Times today, where he calls Russia today fascist. I don't know whether it could be used, as it is an opinion piece, yet on the other hand an essay from a respected scholar, that also seems to cover some of this article's premise. What do you think? @My very best wishes:.--Euor (talk) 13:25, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Euor, My very best wishes: Absolutely. Also, any idea on the etymology of the word? This [7] paper from the Institute of the Lithuanian Language in 2018 observes: rashism 'the ideology and practice of the Russian regime at the beginning of the 21st century (Lithuanian: rašizmas 'XXI amžiaus pradžios Rusijos režimo ideologija ir praktika'). This suggests that the term had reached other languages than Russian or Ukrainian even before the conflict. -- Mindaur (talk) 14:20, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh yes, adding views by well known historian on this subject will improve the page. Noticing etymology also does not hurt. My very best wishes (talk) 14:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

So I am looking at these articles by Snyder.

First one is The War in Ukraine Has Unleashed a New Word. It includes: "Ukrainians have noticed the Russian tilt toward fascism in the last decade. Undistracted by Putin’s operational deployment of genocide talk, they have seen fascist practices in Russia: the cults of the leader and of the dead, the corporatist state, the mythical past, the censorship, the conspiracy theories, the centralized propaganda and now the war of destruction. Even as we rightly debate how applicable the term is to Western figures and parties, we have tended to overlook the central example of fascism’s revival, which is the Putin regime in the Russian Federation."

Second article is We Should Say It. Russia Is Fascist.. It is more interesting:

"Fascism was never defeated as an idea. As a cult of irrationality and violence, it could not be vanquished as an argument: So long as Nazi Germany seemed strong, Europeans and others were tempted. It was only on the battlefields of World War II that fascism was defeated. Now it’s back — and this time, the country fighting a fascist war of destruction is Russia. Should Russia win, fascists around the world will be comforted... today’s Russia meets most of the criteria that scholars tend to apply [to fascism]. It has a cult around a single leader, Vladimir Putin. It has a cult of the dead, organized around World War II. It has a myth of a past golden age of imperial greatness, to be restored by a war of healing violence — the murderous war on Ukraine.

It’s not the first time Ukraine has been the object of fascist war. The conquest of the country was Hitler’s main war aim in 1941. Hitler thought that the Soviet Union, which then ruled Ukraine, was a Jewish state: He planned to replace Soviet rule with his own and claim Ukraine’s fertile agricultural soil. The Soviet Union would be starved, and Germany would become an empire. He imagined that this would be easy because the Soviet Union, to his mind, was an artificial creation and the Ukrainians a colonial people. The similarities to Mr. Putin’s war are striking. The Kremlin defines Ukraine as an artificial state, whose Jewish president proves it cannot be real. After the elimination of a small elite, the thinking goes, the inchoate masses would happily accept Russian dominion. Today it is Russia that is denying Ukrainian food to the world, threatening famine in the global south.

Of course Snyder also noticed that "In 1939, the Soviet Union joined Nazi Germany as a de facto ally, and the two powers invaded Poland together. Nazi speeches were reprinted in the Soviet press and Nazi officers admired Soviet efficiency in mass deportations. But Russians today do not speak of this fact, since memory laws make it a crime to do so. World War II is an element of Mr. Putin’s historical myth of Russian innocence and lost greatness — Russia must enjoy a monopoly on victimhood and on victory. The basic fact that Stalin enabled World War II by allying with Hitler must be unsayable and unthinkable."

And also this: "A time traveler from the 1930s would have no difficulty identifying the Putin regime as fascist. The symbol Z, the rallies, the propaganda, the war as a cleansing act of violence and the death pits around Ukrainian towns make it all very plain. The war against Ukraine is not only a return to the traditional fascist battleground, but also a return to traditional fascist language and practice. Other people are there to be colonized. Russia is innocent because of its ancient past. The existence of Ukraine is an international conspiracy. War is the answer."

"Because Mr. Putin speaks of fascists as the enemy, we might find it hard to grasp that he could in fact be fascist. But in Russia’s war on Ukraine, “Nazi” just means “subhuman enemy”— someone Russians can kill. Hate speech directed at Ukrainians makes it easier to murder them, as we see in Bucha, Mariupol and every part of Ukraine that has been under Russian occupation. Mass graves are not some accident of war, but an expected consequence of a fascist war of destruction... Calling others fascists while being a fascist is the essential Putinist practice. Jason Stanley, an American philosopher, calls it “undermining propaganda.” I have called it “schizofascism.” The Ukrainians have the most elegant formulation. They call it “ruscism.”

Also, this is interesting: "Fascism is not a debating position, but a cult of will that emanates fiction. It is about the mystique of a man who heals the world with violence, and it will be sustained by propaganda right to the end. It can be undone only by demonstrations of the leader’s weakness. The fascist leader has to be defeated, which means that those who oppose fascism have to do what is necessary to defeat him. Only then do the myths come crashing down."

I think this is just brilliant. A lot of that should be included to this page. My very best wishes (talk) 00:21, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I have added some of it, but not all. I don't think the well is dry yet. But I found it hard to rewrite in indirect quote, so I had to perhaps use too much quotes. Some stuff like the time-traveler stuff and the counter-intuitive use by Putin is added. Euor (talk) 01:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I would prefer longer quotations because Snyder is such an excellent writer, but what you did is fine. There are some additional similarities Snyder did not mention. For example, both Putin and Hitler claimed that their attack was a "preemptive strike", but unlike Putin, Hitler had some grounds to believe that USSR will eventually attack him. The existentnce of many small common features is a clear sign that both regimes belong to the same taxon. My very best wishes (talk) 23:39, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I also found the quotes good, that's why it was hard to distill them in such a way as to write it indirectly. If you see under the characteristics section, I added a long quote from him in blockquote.--Euor (talk) 23:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I will look at this more carefully later. Meanwhile, they are burning Ukrainian books - [8]. This is classic. Fahrenheit 451. "Уж коли зло пресечь, Забрать все книги бы да сжечь" [9]. But Alexander Griboyedov meant this as a joke, a satire. Now this is a serious business. But of course Soviet Glavlit did it all the time. My very best wishes (talk) 15:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Far right or far left? Or it is the same?

The point is that Putin and others are the members of soviet communist party. And if Yeltsin refused his party membership card, they didn't. Stalin also used imperial attributes when they were necessary for him: church, "Homeland", "rus...", shoulder straps in army, etc. They are proud of Stalin, they took back the soviet anthem, they totally control the Russuan economy, are they really right? Maximalist (talk) 05:17, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

It’s an interesting point that there seems to be a crossover between communist/Soviet elements and a far right one. Many authors state in this article there’s fascist traits to the regime. At the same time the Communist party in Russia seems mostly on board witj Putin’s project from what I see, and Putin is a nostalgic for the Soviet Union. Maybe it’s related to the horseshoe theory of politics, or the alleged red brown alliance. I have no idea, but the Putin regime and its adherents do nominally seem to constitute an eclectic array of ideologies united under the umbrella of Russian nationalism and anti-Westernism. Euor (talk) 07:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)

I think this is neither "left" nor "right". This is a merger of the Soviet and Russian imperialisms per Nikolai Berdyaev: "The Russian people did not achieve their ancient dream of Moscow, the Third Rome. The ecclesiastical schism of the 17th century revealed that the muscovite tsardom is not the third Rome. The messianic idea of the Russian people assumed either an apocalyptic form or a revolutionary; and then there occurred an amazing event in the destiny of the Russian people. Instead of the Third Rome in Russia, the Third International was achieved, and many of the features of the Third Rome pass over to the Third International. The Third International is also a Holy Empire, and it also is founded on an Orthodox faith. The Third International is not international, but a Russian national idea."

But you need RS to make connection to this page. My very best wishes (talk) 03:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)

Academics who are experts on the matter state that extreme ideologies have a lot in common, and the left-right spectrum is more of a circle, where the very extreme far left is close to the very extreme far right, which have both more in common with each other than for example with the centre-left or centre-right.Abcmaxx (talk) 16:29, 13 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, certainly, and I too read about it in a couple of books. That is why "communism" and fascism converge. That is why the concept of totalitarianism. And here is an illustration as relates to this page: Rashists recreate memorials to Lenin in Ukraine. My very best wishes (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Of course one of the key differences between "left" communists and "right" fascists (as claimed in many sources) is that the former are internationalists, but the latter are nationalists. That's why I cited Berdyaev above who explained that Soviet internationalism was in fact Russian nationalism, the building of New Russian Empire. That is what Putin wanted to do. My very best wishes (talk) 00:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

"Rashism or why russians are the new Nazi". VoxUkraine

"Rashism or why russians are the new Nazi". VoxUkraine

This article is mostly ridiculous, it uses sources such as Vox Ukraine which claims "Russians are the new Nazis", which is ridiculous. It is similar nonsense to how Russia says they are denazifying Ukraine, though they at least show photos of swastikas being used. Nonetheless, this is simple propaganda, that both sides accuse one another of nonsense. Raschism seems like a made-up thing since no one other than Ukrainians claim its existence. Russian irredentism See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_irredentism Ahm1453 (talk) 20:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

You're free to call the article ridiculous, but to claim "no one other than Ukrainians claim its existence" is showing your ignorance of Central and Eastern Europe. Its a made-up term, just as any other term in existence, so that's not a valid argument either. Timothy D. Snyder, which is one of the foremost genocide/totalitarian/fascist scholars around has gone on record to explicitly call the regime fascist numerous times after the invasion, to name just one. That's neither a Ukrainian, nor some random schmuck. Anne Applebaum is another. Niall Ferguson, what many describe as a "conservative" historian (I don't subscribe to the term, but just to contrast with supposedly "liberal" Applebaum), has called Putin's rally for Crimea "fascistic". The people who are considered reliable or to carry an authority in these subjects are calling it as they see it. That's not to say everyone agrees, however. Nor that the article is perfect (its a work in progress). If you find the article disturbing in some way, fine; if you find objectionable sources, point it out (I hadn't noticed VoxUkraine), but to argue the entire article is nonsense, and making a false equivalence with the "de-nazification" stuff is what's really ridiculous. I think its great we have users like you to make sure we aren't falling into biases, and that we stick to reliable sources, but IMO you got it a little wrong here.--Euor (talk) 22:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

talk page issues: time for a FAQ page?

I've only recently started watching this page, but I have a couple observations:

• A minor point perhaps, but I think we should do something about the forest of merge notifications at the top. To have that many notifications fully displayed seems silly and it is taking up a lot of real estate at the top of the page.

• A lot of users coming here to object to the entire concept of this page seem to be mistaking what Wikipedia is and how it works. Wikipedia isn't claiming Russia has gone fascist, it is, as always, reflecting what was already written in sources. A possible way to mitigate this is a FAQ (Frequently Asked Questions) section up top. Will this stop every user who wishes to make the same objections later? No, what it does is make responding easier, with a simple "Please read the FAQ at the top of the page. If you are certain the issue you bringing up is not addressed there then feel free to repost your question." as opposed to having to start from scratch each time.

• If there's enthusiasm for that idea, how to proceed would be either to discuss the phrasing of the questions here, or for someone to simply WP:BB and go ahead and do it by creating Talk:Rashism/FAQ, and then adding {{FAQ}} in a good spot with the other front matter at the top of the page. An fairly simple example of such a page is at Talk:Elk/FAQ.

Thoughts? Beeblebrox (talk) 17:35, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Good points. I've collapsed the forest of merge proposals, as well as the daily readership chart. All are still available on a click, but now don't overwhelm the new reader as much as they once did. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 6 June 2022 (UTC)

>>> Wikipedia isn't claiming Russia has gone fascist, it is, as always, reflecting what was already written in sources.

The problem is that Wikipedia here is used as a dictionary. It also uses inaccurate definitions.

The term "Rashism" was coined by Ukrainians to insult Russians. It consists of two things "Russian" + "Fascism". I have repeatedly tried to get evidence of the presence of "fascism" in Russia from the discussions here. Nobody could prove it. So this article SHOULD NOT exist on wikipedia because it describes something that doesn't exist.

Everyone who claims that the article should be here because "someone somewhere used this word" is in fact a hypocrite. Because in the "sources" this word is used to insult Russians. Accordingly, the sole purpose of this article is to insult the Russians.

If this word should remain on Wikipedia, then only with a definition - "Ukrainians use this word to insult Russians."

Unfortunately, there is little hope for this. Wikipedia has long been and systematically vandalized (not only this article, there are many, including those proposed for merging) by Ukrainians, Balts and other expats who have dedicated their lives to fighting Russia. 109.63.210.144 (talk) 15:00, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Elegantly skipping over the rant above, I support an FAQ. It probably won't hinder stuff like the rant above, but it would make it easier to answer it (by redirecting to FAQ).--Euor (talk) 18:53, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that is basically the perfect example of why this should be a thing. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:07, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:30, 15 June 2022 (UTC)

Can you cover the topic of the presence of fascism in Russia at the state level also? Specify the facts of discrimination against Ukrainians on the territory of Russia. Thank you. 109.63.231.87 (talk) 14:29, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

I initially added all the merge and move templates initially. The reason I did that is because when they weren't there the same proposals were being made over and over again with little merit. Thank you for adding the collapse button, good idea. Abcmaxx (talk) 22:41, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

few words from inner witness

Ok reading recent debates about the topic was a messy work but seems like I got it now. Beeing a sort of a native speaker of Russian I saw a pattern that might alarm you. Liberal thinking people in Russia have a habbit of ignoring some bounds of litreature language witch mean that your understanding of word might be slightly wrong.

I know thats awfull thing to read. But as far as I can judge you got it more or less right. Its a mix of words russia(n) and fachism. But here is a kicker. Both this words have different sub meaning in all CSI countries.

You know. I Just wrote big and boring wall of text just full of water and now I want it to be clear and short. SO...

Term of "rashizm"(what a surprise) not used by russians. But its not used by Ukranians aswell(mostly). Its all due to the fact that this is not a comentary of russain actions or some form of protest. Its a half-insult comparing all kinds of partiotism to purest evil. And by all I MEAN all. Even positive one, like reformism and charity to poor(Yes its a right wing ideas here. All what is not straight hate to existing goverments is more about it below).

in few words thats cause of lack of centristic kind of politicans active active citizens. Russia is split on two camps witch opress not specificly their ideadlogical oposite but all mass of people that beyond their circle. That lead to radilacisation on both sides and forcing people to join one of two to avoid double harasment both from Vatniks(slang for pro Putin Right radical) and Liberaha (a joke-ish name for all liberals, considered as a light insult. Used mostly to show a same as Vatniks radicalism level of oponent by minor right lean people. Not by Vatniks, these just insult them)

So I think You understand where Im leading a point. Rashizm is presented as idea of Russia prospering over ones who weaker, when actually its a libertarian weaponised slang only mean of witch is to tilt all right movement followers to avoid conversation. Its a shortcut to an end of a pointless debate, identification mark and insult at once. please do not mix work of thousands people, like me, on building a propper political debate culture bit bu bit with some emotional radicalism supported mostly by teenagers doing so more of an age's specific than reflection of reality.(Basicly let US judge what our words mean)

I know you want it all to be well bordered, easy to read out info off and well sorted truth. I would like it to be same too. But world is a bit more messy place, we cant devide things on black and white because in that case some, ugly as recent, actions would be made again. Thanks for reading I needed to tell this in any form somewhere.

--Kolterpam (talk) 02:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

No educated individual would use this term, it’s popular among Reddit. JtLea7 (talk) 06:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@JtLea7 I'm sorry, but you're either wrong, biased, or both. Do you mean "no educated Russian would used that term"? The term has come into fairly widespread use in the English language, especially since Russia's appalling and sub-human outrages in Ukraine since Feb 24 2022. The term 'rashist' is evidently used in mainstream media outlets as far afield as Al Jazeera (see here). We follow what reliable sources say, not what you think you can dismiss as a term only found in Reddit posts.

It even appears to be causing Putin's Russians quite a degree of angst. There are stories emerging that "Russia's Roskomnadzor requires Wikipedia to delete articles in English" As yet, I see no reliable source to support that Tweet, so it can't go into the article until substantiated. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes here is the official document of Roskomnadzor 78.113.169.222 (talk) 09:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that also appears in article by Novaya Gazeta - [10] and here. So can be included to the page as something relevant and reliably sourced. My very best wishes (talk) 23:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

"Russia's appalling and sub-human outrages". And you determined that from your room? From what investigations comes this? You're clearly biased and you have no place here. 190.134.2.173 (talk) 23:38, 9 July 2022 (UTC)

See War crimes in the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, or use a search engine of your choice to find innumerable mainstream media accounts and images published across the globe of appalling atrocities and inhuman acts inflicted by Russian aggressors in Ukraine. I think 'sub-human' is a fair description for any fair-minded person to describe these rashists' actions. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:25, 10 July 2022 (UTC)

Illyin fascist adherent

Dear @Alex Bakharev. you reverted my edit on Ilyin being a fascist adherent. If you think it's too strong, how then to describe Ilyin? Here we read on his wikipedia page: Initially a liberal, Ilyin embraced fascism during his exile. So I don't see here some POV from my side. Would be happy to hear your thoughts on this matter. IgorTurzh (talk) 14:21, 12 July 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: Alex Bakharev. Renat 16:43, 19 July 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: IgorTurzh Would "Russian Nationalist philosopher Ivan Ilyin" be sufficiently strong and to the point? Alex Bakharev (talk) 07:37, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

@Alex Bakharev I think so. IgorTurzh (talk) 19:29, 20 July 2022 (UTC)

WP:SYN

I removed new just included section about Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn. The reason: this a speculation based on a single weak reference, an opinion by Ukrainian political consultant Oleg Posternak. Everything else, including text referenced to RFERL [11], is WP:SYN because cited sources do not make a direct connection with ruscism/rashism. They only make a point that both Solzhenitsyn and Putin are Russian nationalists/imperialists. That is not enough for inclusion. We can't place every notable nationalist into this page. My very best wishes (talk) 20:20, 3 August 2022 (UTC)

References

Correct spelling

Why do you use 'rashism' or 'rashist'? It is completely 100% wrong. In Ukrainian they are 'рашисти', and not 'решисти'. Moreover, this term is coined from the same root as 'Russia', and not 'Rashia'. Shmyg (talk) 19:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I advise reading Snyder's article cited in etymology section. He uses Ruscism as English version, but Rashism has nonetheless become very popular as a phonetic translation.--Euor (talk) 20:00, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Dead source link

Hello, I noticed that source ([105] Latkovskis, Bens (26 May 2022). "Timothy Snyder and Alvis Hermanis are wrong. Russism is not fascism". Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze.) is no longer reachable. It's a bit odd, because the Latvian language version of the website is still up and the page appears to be available in the search function on that site (see here https://nra.lv/meklet/?q=timothy+snyder). I would suggest using an archived version of the link so that users can access the source material: http://web.archive.org/web/20220526072644/https://neatkariga.com/opinions/381999-timothy-snyder-and-alvis-hermanis-are-wrong-russism-is-not-fascism

To be perfectly honest this looks like a case of DDOS, but that's outside the scope of the requested edit.

I have sent several messages to nka.lv to ascertain whether this is planned maintenance or something else. I will update this talk page if I receive a reply.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Plank the unwholey (talk • contribs) 14:45, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 4 October 2022

I would like to translate the page in Italian because it's not yet translated Rickyarzu (talk) 06:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

You need to do that on the Italian Wikipedia. See it:Wikipedia:Traduzioni for its guide on translating articles. Kleinpecan (talk) 07:41, 4 October 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

• Russia + Fascism = Ruscism (51911310536).jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 22:22, 3 November 2022 (UTC)

False dichotomy of "classical fascism" vs "postmodern fascism"

Regarding this excerpt:

> Boris Kagarlitsky notes that unlike "the classical fascism", Putin's regime is "Fascism in the era of Postmodernism", "when a coherent worldview is replaced by a haphazard pasting together of ideas, scraps of concepts and randomly assembled images",

This implies classical fascists had a coherent worldview and when in fact they did not (according to Umberto Eco). Also they explicitly rejected modernism from the beginning (also according to Eco). "when a coherent worldview is replaced by a haphazard pasting together of ideas, scraps of concepts and randomly assembled images"— that's what fascism has always been from the beginning. 136.53.56.251 (talk) 04:56, 8 January 2023 (UTC)

Requested move 1 January 2023

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) echidnaLives - talk - edits 02:32, 9 January 2023 (UTC)

---

Rashism → Ruscism – From Russian fascism. Alternatively, if it’s a romanization of the Ukrainian word рашизм, then it should be rashysm. -Agdchh (talk) 19:41, 1 January 2023 (UTC)

• Support  This is a more academic version of the name, and better captures the native intent of the expression, as supported by Snyder’s essay. Rashism is imitative of Slavic languages, but not a precise romanization from either Russian (рашизм = rashizm) nor Ukrainian (рашизм = rashyzm). —Michael Z. 00:19, 3 January 2023 (UTC)
• Support  per Michael Z. -NachtReisender (talk) 23:02, 6 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

Semi-protected edit request on 5 May 2023

In the first line of the last paragraph in the section "Outside Russia" that reads:

'Latvian journalist Bens Latkovskis of Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze has criticized the equation of Russism to fascism as terminologically inaccurate,...',

the word "equation" should be changed to "equating" so that it reads instead as:

'Latvian journalist Bens Latkovskis of Neatkarīgā Rīta Avīze has criticized the equating of Russism to fascism as terminologically inaccurate,...'. 64.126.166.104 (talk) 05:46, 5 May 2023 (UTC)

 Done ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 11:04, 5 May 2023 (UTC)